Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Wondering which armies have formations of formations. Decurion style. Do they all let you take "1- some number of auxiliary"?

Not all, some are more flexed then others.

You got so far necron, khorne, space marines dark angels, eldar, harlequins, tau and admech as far as I know.

Danny slag wrote:
Wondering which armies have formations of formations. Decurion style. Do they all let you take "1- some number of auxiliary"?

Only the 2015 armies have this sort of thing. The 6E and earlier 7E armies do not. There's a very clear divide in capability, power level, and formation-composed-detachment availability between the 2015 books and everything else.

I think the official term is "Warhost" Detachments.

Every Book since Necrons. That means:
Necrons
Korne Demonkin
Skitari - Mechanicus share two (With Imperial Knights in one of them)
Eldar
Space Marines
Dark Angels
Tau

Not entirely correct, as Harlequins (post-Necron codex) doesn't have a Decurion-style Detachment, Skitarii/Cult Mech/Knights only have 2 restrictive Formations (that aren't Decurion-style), 1 in a WD and one as part of a one-click/whilst-stocks-last bundle.
If you include the Skitarii/Cult Mech/Knight Formations, then you also have to count the Space Wolves, Dark Eldar and Orks, as they all got Formations of Formations (that weren't Decurion-style) in various Campaigns/Supplements.

EDIT: The OP specified Decurion-style, so Skitarii/Cult Mech/Knights don't count.

Danny slag wrote:
Wondering which armies have formations of formations. Decurion style. Do they all let you take "1- some number of auxiliary"?

formations flow charts you mean? (because i think anyone who calls it the decurion is a slave to trends) pretty much half of the armies in the game right now

 ionusx wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
Wondering which armies have formations of formations. Decurion style. Do they all let you take "1- some number of auxiliary"?

formations flow charts you mean? (because i think anyone who calls it the decurion is a slave to trends) pretty much half of the armies in the game right now

It's a clear and recognizable term by most of the community.
When I talk about "Decurion style detachments", everyone knows what I'm talking about. When I'm talking about "warhost detachments" or "formation flow charts", half the people in the room don't have a clue what I'm on about.

Stop being a fething hipster. Shouldn't you be using another alphabet because the roman alphabet is too much of a trend?


Anyhow, it's been said before what armies have the Decurion style detachment.
Necrons
Space marines
Eldar
Tau
Dark angels
Khorne daemonkin

Skitarii and Harlequins don't have this style of detachment, they just have multiple loose formations.

 ionusx wrote:
formations flow charts you mean?

That's a good way of describing it, might try that on my play group. I recently ran a campaign and asked people to tell me if they were going to use "Decurion-style formations" and almost noone knew what I meant (even one of the Necron players was confused? Flabbergasting). So I might pinch that idea if that's ok?

DaPino wrote:

 ionusx wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
Wondering which armies have formations of formations. Decurion style. Do they all let you take "1- some number of auxiliary"?

formations flow charts you mean? (because i think anyone who calls it the decurion is a slave to trends) pretty much half of the armies in the game right now

It's a clear and recognizable term by most of the community.
When I talk about "Decurion style detachments", everyone knows what I'm talking about. When I'm talking about "warhost detachments" or "formation flow charts", half the people in the room don't have a clue what I'm on about.

Stop being a fething hipster. Shouldn't you be using another alphabet because the roman alphabet is too much of a trend?


Anyhow, it's been said before what armies have the Decurion style detachment.
Necrons
Space marines
Eldar
Tau
Dark angels
Khorne daemonkin

Skitarii and Harlequins don't have this style of detachment, they just have multiple loose formations.

Thank you for the answer.

It's a real shame skitarii got skipped in this since it'll be 3 years min before they see new rules being so new. Seems like a stupid oversight by GW, just like splitting what is obviously an army into two books of half armies. not surprising though.

 ionusx wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
Wondering which armies have formations of formations. Decurion style. Do they all let you take "1- some number of auxiliary"?

formations flow charts you mean?

Hah! I love that term.